7.6. The directive case
7.6.1. The directive case marker {e}
The directive case only occurs with non-human noun phrases. It is expressed with the enclitic case marker {e}, which is homonymous and cognate with the ergative case marker {e} (see
§7.3). It is also cognate with the local prefix {e} ‘on’ (see §20.3.1). A noun phrase in the directive case expresses an indirect object or an oblique object (§11.4.4). Thus, the directive case mostly mirrors the uses of the dative for the human gender class, but not always (§7.5.2).
The directive case marker {e} shows the same formal behaviour as the ergative case marker {e} (§7.3). This is true for its phonological properties as well as its spelling. We can therefore keep the explanations here brief and focus on giving relevant examples. The directive case occurs far less frequently than the ergative, though, so that the general picture is not as clear as for the latter.
The /e/ of the directive case marker contracts with a preceding vowel. With very few exceptions, the resulting long vowel is ignored in the spelling, so that the directive case looks unmarked after words with a final vowel. Thus, Old Sumerian orthography never expresses the directive case marker after a vowel. E.g.:
(136) lú ummaki-ke4 / e ki-surx(ERIM)-ra-ke4 / izi ba-šúm / an-ta-sur-ra / izi ba-šúm lú umma =ak =e e.g ki.sur.ra=ak =e izi =Ø Ø -ba -n -šúm-Ø man Umma=GEN=ERG dike border =GEN=DIR fire=ABSVP-3N.IO-3SG.A-give -3N.S/DO
an.ta.sur.ra=e izi =Ø Ø -ba -n -šúm-Ø Antasurra =DIR fire=ABSVP-3N.IO-3SG.A-give -3N.S/DO
‘The Ummaite set fire to the border dike. He set fire to the Antasurra.’ (Ukg. 16 1:1-5;
L; 24)
But texts from the Gudea and Ur III periods occasionally indicate the resulting long vowel with a plene spelling, by repeating the final vowel of the word (§2.5):
(137) mu-bé-e an-zà-ta kur-kur-re gú im-ma-si-si
mu =be=e an.zà.g =ta kur -kur =e name=its=DIR border.of.heaven=ABL mountains-mountains=ERG
gú =Ø ÷i-m(u) -ba -b -si -si -Ø neck=ABSVP-VENT-3N.IO-3N.A-fill-fill-3N.S/DO
‘From the borders of heaven the foreign lands will gather for its fame.’ (Cyl A 9:18; L;
22). Note that the phrasal verb gú—si means ‘assemble’.
(138) ù nè mar-dú / ma-da-né-e / bí-in-gi4-a
ù nè mar.dú ma.da=ane=e Ø -bi -n -gi4 -Ø -÷a =÷a and force Amorite land =his =DIRVP-3N.OO-3SG.A-turn-3N.S/DO-NOM=LOC
‘and when he had driven back the Amorite force to his land’ (FAOS 9/2 Šūsuen 9 24-26; U; 21)
(139) me-zu-ù šu bí-d[u7]
me =zu =e šu =Ø Ø -bi -n -du7.ř -Ø essence=your=DIR hand=ABSVP-3N.OO-3SG.A-be.perfect-3N.S/DO
‘He perfected your attributes.’ (Shulgi R 9; N; 21, OB copy)
Similarly: me-e (Cyl A 20:22; L; 22), iri-e (for */erē/?, Cyl B 18:12; L; 22), in-da-ĝá-la-a (TCTI 2:3600 7; L; 21).
After a consonant, the directive case marker always has its full form /e/. It is then written with a CV-sign, in combination with the preceding consonant, or with the V-sign e. Just as with the ergative case marker (§7.3), there is a partial shift from CV-spellings to the spelling with e after the Old Sumerian period.
After the plain voiceless stops /b/, /d/, and /g/, the spellings with bé, dè, and ge are the only ones used in the Old Sumerian texts from Lagash. E.g.:
(140) dub-bé dah~~~~-h~~~~a dub =e dah~~~~-Ø -÷a tablet=DIR add-NFIN-NOM
‘the ones added to the tablet’ (Nik 1:54 2:2; L; 24) (141) udu íd-dè bala-e-dè
udu=Ø íd =e bala÷-ed -Ø =e ram =ABS river=DIR cross -IPFV-NFIN=DIR
‘to bring sheep across the river’ (RTC 341 4; L; 21)
Later texts show the spelling e after /b/: e.g. ù-šub-e (Cyl A 18:23; L; 22), áb-e (SACT 1:8 2;
D; 21). After /d/ and /g/, spellings with dè and ge remain the norm: e.g. ĝá-ĝá-dè (ECTJ 151 7;
N; 23), u4-ù-dè (Cyl A 8:2; L; 22), di-dè (Cyl A 20:23; L; 22), lugal-zà-ge-si (STH 2:117 2;
L; 21), an-šà-ge (Cyl B 1:7; L; 22), nin-bara2-ge-si (MVN 6:147 obv 7; L; 21), túg-e (UTAMI 4:2435 2; U; 21), šà-kù-ge (MVN 15:126 12; U; 21).
After the voiceless aspirated stop /k/, the spelling with -ke4 is the only one used. E.g.:
(142) é dmes-an-du-ke4 ús-sa-ta
é mes.an.du=ak =e ús -Ø -÷a =ta house Mesandu =GEN=DIR be.next.to-NFIN-NOM=ABL
‘From the house next to the one of Mesandu’ (DP 173 5:5; L; 24) (143) dnisaba-ke4 é ĝeštu2-ke4 / ĝál mu-na-taka4
nisaba.k=e é.j ĝeštu2.g=ak =e ĝál=Ø Ø -mu -nna -n -taka4-Ø Nisaba =ERG house ear =GEN=DIR ?? =ABSVP-VENT-3SG.IO-3SG.A-leave -3N.S/DO
‘Nisaba opened for him the House of Wisdom (lit. “the Ear”).’ (Cyl A 17:16; L; 22).
Note that the phrasal verb ĝál—taka4 means ‘open’.
There are no attestations of a directive case marker after the plain voiceless affricate /z/, but after the voiceless aspirated affricate /ř/, there is a clear shift from a CV-spelling to a V-spell-ing. E.g.:
(144) gu4 d[u7] máš du7-ře6 ĝiš bí-tag
gu4.ř du7.ř máš du7.ř =e ĝiš =Ø Ø -bi -n -tag -Ø bull perfect kid perfect=DIR wood=ABSVP-3N.OO-3SG.A-touch-3N.S/DO
‘He sacrificed faultless bulls and faultless kids (lit. “let wood touch them”).’ (Cyl A 18:7; L; 22)
The same phrase is written elsewhere du7-e (Cyl B 18:19; L; 22). A clear case is the spelling with the noun ĝu4.ř ‘bull, ox’, which is consistently gu4-e and never gu4-ře6 in the Ur III texts:
e.g. gu4-e ús-sa (passim, e.g. SAT 3:1928 3; D; 21).
After the fricatives /s/, /š/, and /h~/, e is the only spelling attested. Even though the CV-signs šè and h~~~~e are available, the scribes never use them to write the directive case marker. E.g.:
(145) íd mah~~~~-e ús-sa
íd mah~~~~ =e ús -Ø -÷a river great=DIR be.next.to-NFIN-NOM
‘next to the Great Canal’ (RTC 73 3:1; L; 24) (146) kuš-e ak-dè
kuš =e ak -ed -Ø =e hide=DIR make-IPFV-NFIN=DIR
‘(fat) for treating hides’ (OIP 14:126 2; A; 23)
Similarly: kuš-e (MVN 22:230 tablet obv 4; L; 21), ĝiš-e (Cyl A 7:16; L; 22), ĝiš-e (SAT 3:1524 2; U; 21), kas4-e (Cyl A 7:20; L; 22), é-kas4-e (MVN 21:202 rev 22; U; 21), ĝišmes-e (Cyl A 7:17; L; 22).
After /ĝ/, the spelling with ĝe26 is attested once in the proper name lugal-ùĝ-ĝe26 ‘the king (is good) for the people’ (MAD 4:78 16; I; 23), but for the rest the spelling e is used. E.g.:
(147) dšul-ge-ùĝ-e-ba-sa6
šul.ge.r=Ø ùĝ =e Ø -ba -sa6.g -Ø Shulgi =ABS people=DIRVP-3N.IO-be.good-3SG.S/DO
‘(King) Shulgi is good for the people.’ (PN) (UDT 59 88; L; 21)
Similarly: ùĝ-e (Cyl A 11:24; L; 22), dutu-ùĝ-e (STH 2:10 1:2; L; 21), nin-saĝ-e-ki-áĝ (TuT 158 3:18'; L; 21), ki-a-naĝ-e (St B 7:55; L; 22), šeĝx(IM.A)-e (Cyl A 11:7; L; 22).
After /m/, the spelling with me is found in the Old Sumerian texts from Lagash in a proper name:
(148) nin-éš-dam-me-ki-áĝ
nin =Ø éš.dam=e ki =Ø áĝ -Ø queen=ABS tavern =DIR place=ABS measure.out-NFIN
‘The queen is one who loves (lit. “measures out a place for”) the tavern.’ (13x, e.g. CT 50:34 14:9; L; 24)
The same name is written once nin-éš-dam-e-ki-áĝ (STH 1:23 15:17; L; 24). Later the spell-ing seems to be always with e: e.g. lugal-urim5ki-e (UET 3:359 2; Ur; 21), am-e (PDT 1:498 4; D; 21), lugal-ú-šim-e (passim, e.g. MVN 11:81 3; L; 21).
After /n/, the spelling with né is the only one found in the Old Sumerian texts from Lagash:
e.g. me-an-né-si (DP 555 3:9; L; 24), im-nun-né (RTC 74 1:4; L; 24), lugal-apin-né (RTC 39 4:5; L; 24), é-eden-né-si (DP 195 9:8'; L; 24). In many words this spelling with né remains the norm in later texts: e.g. an-né (Cyl A 25:8; L; 22), an-né-ba-ab-du7 (passim, e.g. NRVN 1:295 3; N; 21), lugal-ĝír-nun-né (MVN 6:112 rev 11; L; 21), lugal-unken-né (MVN 14:431 rev 3; U; 21). In other words, the spelling with e is the normal one in Neo-Sumerian texts: e.g.
alan-e (St B 7:22; L; 22), nin-eden-e-ba-du7 (CTNMC 54 5:49; L; 21), apin-e (Nisaba 9:316 obv 2; U; 21).
After /r/, the normal spelling in the Old Sumerian texts from Lagash is -ré. E.g.:
(149) sùr-ré ús-sa
sùr =e ús -Ø -÷a ditch=DIR be.next.to-NFIN-NOM
‘next to the ditch’ (RTC 74 1:2; L; 24)
Later the CV-sign re replaces ré: e.g. kur-re (Cyl A 29:17; L; 22), ùr-re-ba-ab-du7 (TCL 2:5506 27; D; 21), lugal-má-gur8-re (AUCT 1:518 2; D; 21). In some words, the spelling with re alternates with e: e.g. kar-re (UTAMI 6:3683 obv 5; U; 21), kar-e (SAT 2:1001 4:2; U;
21).
After /l/, the normal spelling in the Old Sumerian texts from Lagash is le: e.g. nin-é-gal-le-si (DP 176 4:6; L; 24), ĝišgal-le-nin-é-gal-le-si (ITT 5:9232 3:3; L; 24), me-kisal-le (BIN 8:345 5:15; L;
24). Later the spelling becomes e in most words: e.g. gal-e (Cyl A 15:22; L; 22), é-gal-e-si (TCTI 1:934 5; L; 21), lugal-kisal-e-si (TCNU 713 2:8'; U; 21), nin-ù-kul-e-ki-áĝ (AUCT 3:390 seal 3; D; 21). With the word ga-ti.l ‘ex voto’, though, the spelling varies regionally.
Nippur has consistently ga-ti-le (e.g. NATN 250 seal 3; N; 21), whereas elsewhere ga-ti-e is the norm: e.g. (MVN 19:62 5; L; 21), (MVN 16:683 obv 2; U; 21), (UET 3:884 seal 1; Ur 21).
After /÷/ (cf. §3.2.4), the scribes always write e. E.g.:
(150) še-ba-e da-h~~~~e-dam
še.ba÷ =e dah~~~~-ed -Ø =÷am barley.ration=DIR add -IPFV-NFIN=be:3N.S
‘This is to be added to the barley rations.’ (MVN 14:479 rev 1; U; 21) Similarly: níĝ-ba-e (Cyl A 6:26; L; 22).
After /j/ (cf. §3.8), the spelling is also consistently e. E.g.:
(151) é-e ba-an-du11
é.j =e Ø -ba -n -du11.g-Ø house=DIRVP-3N.IO-3SG.A-say -3N.S/DO
‘She spoke to the temple.’ (Cyl B 4:6; L; 22)
Similarly: a-e (Ent. 28 4:10; L; 25), é-e (Cyl A 29:1; L; 22), é-e (BBVO 11 p. 286 6-NT-454 2:4'; N; 21).
7.6.2. Uses
Noun phrases in the directive case can be used adverbially or adnominally, but the latter use is rare and restricted to a single construction (see below). All uses are adverbial unless stated otherwise.
A noun phrase in the directive case can express an indirect object (§17.3). E.g.:
(152) dba-ú nam-šita iri-ka-ge-na-ka-ke4 ba-gub
ba.ú=Ø nam.šita iri.ka.ge.na.k=ak =e Ø -ba -gub -Ø Bau =ABS supplication Irikagena =GEN=DIR VP-3N.IO-stand-3SG.S/DO
‘Bau is on duty for the supplication of Irikagena.’ (Ukg. 53 1; L; 24) A noun phrase in the directive case can express an oblique object (§18.3). E.g.:
(153) gù-dé-a en dnin-ĝír-su-ke4 / šà kù-ge bí-pà
gù.dé.a=Ø en nin.ĝír.su.k=e šà.g kù.g=e Ø -bi -n -pà.d-Ø Gudea =ABS lord Ningirsu =ERG heart pure=DIR VP-3N.OO-3SG.A-find -3SG.S/DO
‘Lord Ningirsu chose Gudea in his pure heart (lit. “let (his) pure heart find Gudea”).’
(Cyl A 23:22-23; L; 22)
See chapter 17 and 18 for more details on indirect and oblique objects.
The normal method in Sumerian to make a purpose clause is to use an imperfective parti-ciple in the directive case. Such a purpose clause can be used adverbially or adnominally. E.g.:
(154) é kù řú-dè gú-bé mu-ši-íb-íl
é kù.g=Ø řú -ed -Ø =e gú =be=Ø Ø -mu -n -ši-b -÷íl-Ø house pure=ABS erect-IPFV-NFIN=DIR neck=its=ABSVP-VENT-3SG-to-3N.A-lift-3N.S/DO
‘It raised its neck towards him in order to build the holy temple.’ (Cyl A 1:16; L; 22) (155) 0.0.2 kaš gi6 sig5 bala-bala-e-dè
0.0.2 kaš gi6 sig5 =Ø bala÷-bala÷-ed -Ø =e 20.litres beer black good=ABS cross -cross -IPFV-NFIN=DIR
‘twenty litres of good dark beer to be libated’ (e.g. UET 3:109 2; Ur; 21) See §28.4.4 for details.
The Old Sumerian texts from Lagash contain a construction where the directive case marker is unexpectedly absent (Krecher 1987: 77). Consider the following non-finite counterpart of the previous example:
(156) sipa šà-ge pà-da / dnin-ĝír-su-ka-ke4
sipa šà.g =e pà.d-Ø -÷a nin.ĝír.su.k=ak =e shepherd heart=DIR find -NFIN-NOM Ningirsu =GEN=ERG
‘shepherd (ergative) chosen in his pure heart by Ningirsu (lit. “the by the heart found one of Ningirsu”)’ (St B 2:8-9; L; 22)
This construction is also found in Old Sumerian:
(157) šà kù-ge pà-da / dnanše / nin uru16-na-ke4
šà.g kù.g=e pà.d-Ø -÷a nanše nin uru16.n=ak =e heart pure=DIR find -NFIN-NOM Nanshe lady august =GEN=ERG
‘the one (ergative) chosen in her pure heart by Nanshe, the august lady’ (Ean. 60 1:6-8;
L; 25)
However, if the phrase šà kù-ge pà-da lacks the adjective, the directive case marker is also absent. E.g.:
(158) šà pà-da / dnanše-ke4
šà.g pà.d-Ø -÷a nanše =ak =e heart find -NFIN-NOM Nanshe=GEN=ERG
‘the one (ergative) chosen in her heart by Nanshe’ (Ean. 11 1:9-2:1; L; 25)
This construction šà pà-da is typical for Old Sumerian. As can be seen from ex. 156 above, later Sumerian shows the expected case marker.
The directive case can be used to mark explicitly that a noun phrase is the topic of the clause. It must then be translated as ‘as for’ or the like. E.g.:
(159) idim-e a-na nu-zu
idim =e a.na =Ø nu =÷i -n -zu -Ø spring=DIR what=ABSNEG=VP-3SG.A-know-3N.S/DO
‘As for the spring, what does he not know?’ (VS 10:189 8; ?; 21) (160) ge-m[u]š?-zu-ù ušumgal ki-nú-bé-a ù du10 ku4-me-èn
ge.muš =zu =e ušumgal ki.nú =be=÷a punting.pole=your=DIR dragon lying.place=its=LOC
ù du10.g=Ø ku4 -Ø =Ø =me-en sleep sweet =ABS sleep-NFIN=ABS=be -2SG.S
‘As for your punting-poles, you are a dragon, sleeping a sweet sleep in its den.’ (Shulgi R 13; N; 21, OB copy)
This clause comes from a hymnic description of a boat and is one of an entire series of similar clauses, all with the structure NP-zu-ù NP-me-èn ‘as for your ..., you are ...’ (Shulgi R 10-20, 23-27, 32-39; N; 21). The same structure is also found in later texts, albeit with a different spelling:
(161) murgu2-zu dub sar-sar-re-me-en
murgu2=zu =e dub =Ø sar -sar -ed -Ø =Ø =me-en back =your=DIR tablet=ABS write-write-IPFV-NFIN=ABS=be -2SG.S
‘As for your (bent) spine, you are (like) one who writes tablets all the time.’ (Lugal-banda II 122; OB)
The Old Babylonian spelling murgu2-zu ‘your back’ can be interpreted as an absolutive, ergative, or directive case. The spelling -zu-ù of Shulgi R can only represent an ergative or a directive case. Since an ergative is impossible in an intransitive clause, we must be dealing with a directive case in these constructions and not with an absolutive (pace Zólyomi 2005b:
177-178).
Some Sumerologists claim that the directive case can also be used with human noun phrases. The first to do so was Falkenstein (1939: 181-183), who collected several attestations of a spelling ke4 replacing an expected dative ra. He considered this type of form to be authen-tic and analysed it as directive {e} following genitive {ak}. Later he added more material, including forms with simple e for dative ra, without a preceding genitive (Falkenstein 1941-44: 125). Additional evidence was adduced by Jacobsen (1983: 195), Attinger (1993: 240), and Zólyomi (2000).
As already noted by Falkenstein himself, these forms are extremely rare (Falkenstein 1950:
118). Most attestations come from Old Babylonian literary texts and fall therefore outside the
scope of the present grammar. Not all of Falkenstein’s older attestations can be upheld. His only Old Sumerian example was a form dinanna-ke4 (Ent. 49 1:1; L; 25), in an inscription for which we now have numerous duplicates with the expected form dinanna-ra.
Two of Falkenstein’s Ur III examples occur in a single text and have been underlined in the following passage:
(162) ur-dlama3 ab-ba ses-kal-la-ke4 / é ur-dkuš7-dba-ú dumu na-mu-ka / še-ba siki-ba / šu al-la dub-sar-ta / nam-urdu2-šè ba-na-šúm-[ma] / ù ur-dlama3-ke4 / ses-kal-la urdu2 / ki ur-dkuš7-dba-ú-ka-àm ì-dú-da
ur.lama3.k ab.ba ses.kal.la=ak =e (...) Ø -ba -nna -šúm-Ø -÷a Urlama father Seskalla =GEN=ERG (...) VP-MM-3SG.IO-give -3N.S/DO-NOM
ù ur.lama3.k=e (...) ÷i-n -dú.d -Ø -÷a and Urlama =ERG (...) VP-3SG.A-give.birth.to-3SG.S/DO-NOM
‘that <to> Urlama, the father of Seskalla, in the house of Urkushbau, the son of Namu, barley rations and wool rations had been given out of the hand of Alla, the scribe, for (his) position of slave and that Urlama had fathered Seskalla, the slave, at Urkushbau’s place’ (NG 32: 5-12; L; 21)
However, the form ur-dlama3-ke4 is not a directive but an ergative, and expresses the transitive subject of the verbal form ì-dú-da. The other form from this text, ur-dlama3 ab-ba ses-kal-la-ke4, shows a clear ke4 for an expected ra. In my view, it is a clearcut case of a compositional mistake: the text begins with ur-dlama3 in the ergative case, then it has a few lines later a verbal form which calls for a dative, and then continues with a new and now correct ur-dlama3
in the ergative case. The scribe seems to have started out with the second verbal form in mind.
Moreover, that the first ergative cannot possibly be a directive is also proven by the other attestations of the verbal form ba(-an)-na-šúm, which are construed with clear datives (e.g.
NG 126 12-13; L; 21).
Falkenstein has pointed out one more instance from the Ur III period with ke4 for expected ra. It occurs in a seal insciption:
(163) dmes-lam-ta-è-[a] / lugal á zi-da / lagaski-ke4 / (...) / ki-lul-la gu-za-lá / dumu ur-ba-gara2-ke4 / mu-na-dím
mes.lam.ta.è.a (...) lagas =ak =e Meslamtaea (...) Lagash=GEN=ERG
ki.lul.la (...)=e Ø -mu -nna -n -dím -Ø Kilulla (...)=ERGVP-VENT-3SG.IO-3SG.A-create-3N.S/DO
‘For Meslamtaea, the king, right arm of Lagash, (...) Kilulla, the throne bearer, the son of Urbagara, fashioned this for him.’ (RIM E3/2.1.2.2039 1-9; L; 21)
Here, too, it is far more likely that the underlined ke4 is a simple scribal mistake for ra, which is the form that we expect here and which is also the form that we find elsewhere in the many hundreds of other attestations with the verbal form mu-na-dím (e.g. in the year name for Šu-suen 8).
A further Ur III attestation of ke4 for expected ra was proposed by Zólyomi (2000). It involves a clause that occurs twice in the same administrative text, once as a main clause and once as a subordinate clause between mu (...)-šè ‘because (...)’:
(164) ur-dsuen dumu lugal-ke4 šu-na ba-a-gi4